Start 30 days free, no card. Full Pro access for a month, then decide. Start free

Back to analysts list

Analyst

Eric Stine

Craig-Hallum · covers Utilities, Industrials

Period: Reporting periods mapped to calendar 2024 Q4 – 2026 Q2 (7 quarters).

Questions
18on tracked calls
Challenge rate
0%none of 18 questions
Companies
2questioned at least once
Reporting periods
7with questions

These figures cover the whole profile: every tracked question, all reporting periods.

How to read these numbers

Challenge rate is the share of questions that pushed back, pressed for specifics or questioned management’s assumptions. It describes how questions were asked on the calls tracked here; it does not measure whether any view turned out to be right. See how we grade analysts on earnings-call questions.

Rounding. Rates are rounded to whole percentages, so a small share can show as 0% even when some questions were challenging. The count beside each rate is exact; “none of N questions” means no question was challenging.

No questions recorded. “—” means there is nothing to calculate: no questions were recorded for that period on the calls tracked here. It does not mean there was no activity.

Fewer than 3 questions. A company-level rate is withheld when fewer than 3 questions were recorded for that company; the questions are still counted everywhere else.

Small samples. Profiles with fewer than 10 questions are marked Limited sample.

Reporting periods. Questions are grouped by the calendar quarter each company’s fiscal reporting period maps to, not by the date of the call. Periods without a calendar mapping are listed separately under their fiscal label.

Questions asked

Grouped by company, most questions first. Open a company to read its questions, newest reporting period first.

Showing 18 of 18 questions from 2 companies

SMRNuScale Power Corporation11 questions · 7 reporting periods · 0 of 11 challenging
SMR company page →

Calendar 2026 Q2

can you just maybe talk a little bit more about ENTRA1's project pipeline and how that's evolving just in terms of end users?

Show response

Asked by Luke Persons on for Eric Stine. CEO cited ongoing hyperscaler and data-center dialogue but gave no specific customers, keeping focus on TVA.

did the sizable financial and trade commitments from Japan and South Korea play into the timeline at all for converting TVA into firm PPA?

Capital AllocationTranscript · FY2026 Q2 →
Show response

Asked by Luke Persons on for Eric Stine. CFO said the Japan/Korea commitments are promising but the TVA plant's capital structure is not dependent on that cash.

Calendar 2026 Q1

I would assume that just the fact all of the things that have been done in the supply chain

Show response

CCO agreed, noting many suppliers are also strategic investors and that years of long-lead-item ordering is a hard-to-replicate advantage.

did they appreciate the fact that it's light water technology that you're using a readily available fuel

Competitive DynamicsDemandTranscript · FY2026 Q1 →
Show response

CEO and CFO said serious customers understand the Part 52 vs Part 50 risk differentiation and want reliable clean power without owning a nuclear asset.

Calendar 2025 Q4

I know that it's committed to 20 modules a year committed to being able to take that higher

Supply ChainCapex InvestmentTranscript · FY2025 Q4 →
Show response

COO confirmed 12 modules in production and Doosan's ramp toward higher capacity, answering the capacity-confidence question directly.

Is that something that's firm that gets triggered on the signing of a PPA?

Capital AllocationTranscript · FY2025 Q4 →
Show response

General Counsel declined to unpack the ENTRA1 term sheet or PPA-trigger mechanics, citing an NDA.

Calendar 2025 Q3

But we should view this as this is a very critical step getting to your goal, which is a firm agreement by 2025.

DemandGuidance ReliabilityTranscript · FY2025 Q3 →
Show response

Hopkins confirmed it is a critical step (not the final firm agreement) and said InterOne is finalizing the PPAs, a direct, framing answer.

Calendar 2025 Q2

set off maybe a higher number of discussions, maybe taking those discussions to an elevated level of engagement

DemandRegulation PolicyTranscript · FY2025 Q2 →
Show response

Stine asked whether the early 77 MWe uprate approval lifted customer engagement; management said it is seeing more line of sight to potential customers and that a prospect resumed discussions.

Calendar 2025 Q1

I'm just curious the importance of light water technology rather than some of the other advanced reactors

Competitive DynamicsRegulation PolicyTranscript · FY2025 Q1 →
Show response

Hopkins argued light-water technology's 70-year regulatory track record differentiates NuScale, which already has NRC design approval unlike demonstration-phase rivals.

Calendar 2024 Q4

are you seeing any change to the view of traditional nuclear and restart plants that are out there

Competitive DynamicsDemandTranscript · FY2024 Q4 →
Show response

Hopkins said few large plants can restart and expects SMRs, not gigawatt-scale restarts, to be the primary near-term addition to the grid.

can you detail kind of the steps that are left? Or is it just getting through the process

Regulation PolicyInnovation & R&DTranscript · FY2024 Q4 →
Show response

Hopkins said technical requirements for the 77 MW uprate are essentially complete with only the administrative NRC process remaining, targeting mid-2025.

OKLOOklo Inc.7 questions · 4 reporting periods · 0 of 7 challenging
OKLO company page →

Calendar 2025 Q4

so next step then would be to see a firm PPA with Meta. I mean is that the right way to think about this here

Show response

CEO said the Meta agreement is already a binding commitment and a PPA would come together over the next year or so as procurement advances.

So maybe just talk about or characterize the PPA discussions with other potential customers.

Show response

CEO said conversations with major players have accelerated toward binding, prepayment-style offtakes but gave no specific new PPA.

Calendar 2025 Q2

the topical report accepted by NRC, I mean, is there a way to think about the timing of that process?

Regulation PolicyInnovation & R&DTranscript · FY2025 Q2 →
Show response

Jake said the topical report process runs about 12 months and, rather than accelerating the first plant, delivers significant scalability benefits for subsequent deployments.

Calendar 2025 Q1

should we still think about timing of the actual COLA submission to be

Show response

Jake reaffirmed a Q4 full-application timeframe, following Phase 1 readiness feedback, with possible upside from pending executive actions.

as you get closer to submitting the COLA, I mean, is your confidence higher, or what has maybe changed in your view

Show response

Jake pointed to 600-plus NRC meetings and engagement since 2016 as building confidence, while stressing the goal is licensing efficiently and scalably, not just obtaining a license.

Calendar 2024 Q4

how is that kind of changed discussions or driven discussions around prepayments such as you've got with Equinix

Capital AllocationDemandTranscript · FY2024 Q4 →
Show response

Management gave a discursive answer describing many partnership structures (prepayments, strategic investment, JVs, supply chain) rather than quantifying prepayment demand.

Could you just lay out some of the signposts to look for, you know, so we can kinda track if, in fact

Show response

Management named facility build-out, materials sourcing and regulatory milestones as watch points but did not give a crisp checklist of dated signposts.

Challenge rate by company

Every company this analyst questioned, most questions first. A company-level rate is shown from 3 questions; below that it is withheld.

CompanyQuestionsChallenge rate
SMR NuScale Power Corporation110%none of 11 questions
OKLO Oklo Inc.70%none of 7 questions
  • SMR
    NuScale Power Corporation · 11 questions
    0%none of 11 questions
  • OKLO
    Oklo Inc. · 7 questions
    0%none of 7 questions

Activity by reporting period

Questions recorded for each calendar quarter that companies’ reporting periods map to (not the call date), with the challenge rate for that period. Periods inside the range with no questions are shown as “No questions recorded”.

Questions by calendar reporting period
Calendar periodQuestionsChallenge rateCompanies
2024 Q440%none of 4 questions2
2025 Q130%none of 3 questions2
2025 Q220%none of 2 questions2
2025 Q310%none of 1 question1
2025 Q440%none of 4 questions2
2026 Q120%none of 2 questions1
2026 Q220%none of 2 questions1
  1. 2024 Q44 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 4 questions) · 2 companies
  2. 2025 Q13 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 3 questions) · 2 companies
  3. 2025 Q22 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 2 companies
  4. 2025 Q31 question · challenge rate 0% (none of 1 question) · 1 company
  5. 2025 Q44 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 4 questions) · 2 companies
  6. 2026 Q12 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 1 company
  7. 2026 Q22 questions · challenge rate 0% (none of 2 questions) · 1 company

Topics

Topics tagged on this analyst’s questions.

  • Demand8
  • Regulation Policy6
  • Capital Allocation3
  • Competitive Dynamics3
  • Supply Chain2
  • Innovation & R&D2
  • Capex Investment1
  • Guidance Reliability1
  • M&A1
  • Revenue Growth1